Senator Hillary Clinton, along with a number of other extreme liberal Senators, has gotten it wrong. The voters of America should make these disgraceful Senators pay for their actions against the President’s qualified nominee. Clinton has published a long tome on her reasons for voting against Judge John Roberts’ nomination for chief justice. Nowhere in the rant does she cite any “disqualifications” of the judge for serving on the highest court in the land.

Instead, she cites:

  • “… the Judge has (not) presented his views with enough clarity and specificity for me to in good conscience cast a vote on his behalf.” (He has stated that his view of his role is to interpret the Constitution. Therefore, why should his personal views matter?)
  • She is not “convinced (he) will be steadfast in protecting fundamental women’s rights, civil rights, privacy rights, and who will respect the appropriate separation of powers among the three branch“. (He has already sworn oaths to support the Constitution.)
  • Senator Clinton cites legal memoranda that Judge Roberts wrote for his clients while a practicing attorney. “Was he just being an advocate for a client or was he using his position to advocate for positions he believed in? The record is unclear.” (Apparently Senator Clinton, the nation’s “supposed” smartest woman lawyer, believes that a lawyer’s advocacy for a client, should disqualify him/her from the bench.)
  • The New York Senator’s final reason for voting against the eminently qualified judge is because “President Bush has said the Justices he most admires are the two most conservative justices, Justices Thomas and Scalia. It is not unreasonable to believe that the President has picked someone in Judge Roberts whom he believes holds a similarly conservative philosophy, and … could further limit the power of the Congress, expand the purview of the Executive, and overturn key rulings like Roe v. Wade.” (The Republican president is not permitted to have his picks respected, although her husband’s two Supreme court nominees were overwhelmingly supported by Republican Senators, not because they approved of their ultra-liberal views, but because both of them were judicially qualified. That last citing, “Roe v. Wade” is the be-all and end-all of the liberal mantra. The country is doomed if abortion on demand is curtailed, they believe. However, there is no indication that Judge Roberts would vote against it. I suspect that just as Sandra Day O’Connor, Roberts will vote to uphold it, even though it goes against his personal moral beliefs.)